Medical - Care Facilities
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CCM vs MLAB vs RDNT vs NEOG vs IDXX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
CCM vs MLAB vs RDNT vs NEOG vs IDXX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Care Facilities | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $836K | $578M | $4.51B | $1.97B | $44.49B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $366M | $248M | $2.04B | $880M | $4.45B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-163M | $4M | $47M | $-603M | $1.10B |
| Gross Margin | -11.4% | 60.6% | 11.2% | 38.0% | 62.1% |
| Operating Margin | -131.0% | 7.0% | 3.0% | -2.0% | 31.6% |
| Forward P/E | 1.4x | 11.5x | 94.4x | 25.3x | 38.3x |
| Total Debt | $3.93B | $181M | $1.86B | $913M | $1.08B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $216M | $27M | $767M | $129M | $180M |
CCM vs MLAB vs RDNT vs NEOG vs IDXX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Concord Medical Ser… (CCM) | 100 | 41.3 | -58.7% |
| Mesa Laboratories, … (MLAB) | 100 | 39.6 | -60.4% |
| RadNet, Inc. (RDNT) | 100 | 341.9 | +241.9% |
| Neogen Corporation (NEOG) | 100 | 25.4 | -74.6% |
| IDEXX Laboratories,… (IDXX) | 100 | 181.3 | +81.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CCM vs MLAB vs RDNT vs NEOG vs IDXX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CCM has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.51
- Lower P/E (1.4x vs 38.3x)
- Beta 0.51 vs MLAB's 1.75
MLAB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 11.5%, EPS growth 99.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.3%
- 0.6% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
RDNT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 9.6% 10Y total return vs IDXX's 5.4%
- 11.5% revenue growth vs CCM's -28.6%
NEOG is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +51.1% vs CCM's -23.0%
IDXX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.36, Low D/E 67.1%, current ratio 1.17x
- Beta 1.36, current ratio 1.17x
- 24.6% margin vs NEOG's -68.5%
- 32.6% ROA vs NEOG's -17.9%, ROIC 42.5% vs 0.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.5% revenue growth vs CCM's -28.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.4x vs 38.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 24.6% margin vs NEOG's -68.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.51 vs MLAB's 1.75 | |
| Dividends | 0.6% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +51.1% vs CCM's -23.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.6% ROA vs NEOG's -17.9%, ROIC 42.5% vs 0.2% |
CCM vs MLAB vs RDNT vs NEOG vs IDXX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CCM vs MLAB vs RDNT vs NEOG vs IDXX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IDXX leads in 2 of 6 categories
RDNT leads 1 • CCM leads 0 • MLAB leads 0 • NEOG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IDXX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IDXX is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.4B annually — 18.0x MLAB's $248M. IDXX is the more profitable business, keeping 24.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NEOG's -68.5%. On growth, RDNT holds the edge at +14.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $366M | $248M | $2.0B | $880M | $4.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$359M | $37M | $214M | $100M | $1.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$163M | $4M | $47M | -$603M | $1.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $0 | $38M | -$178M | $17M | $845M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -11.4% | +60.6% | +11.2% | +38.0% | +62.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -131.0% | +7.0% | +3.0% | -2.0% | +31.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -44.6% | +1.5% | +2.3% | -68.5% | +24.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.1% | +15.2% | -8.7% | +2.0% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.3% | +3.6% | +14.8% | -2.8% | +14.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +84.0% | +3.1% | -114.1% | +96.5% | +16.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CCM and MLAB each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, MLAB's 17.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than IDXX's 30.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $835,830 | $578M | $4.5B | $2.0B | $44.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $547M | $732M | $5.6B | $2.8B | $45.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.02x | -290.69x | -233.04x | -1.80x | 42.82x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.37x | 11.54x | 94.41x | 25.31x | 38.29x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 3.00x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 17.92x | 26.16x | 20.37x | 30.95x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.01x | 2.40x | 2.21x | 2.20x | 10.34x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 3.55x | 3.23x | 0.95x | 28.15x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 13.67x | 52.70x | — | 42.23x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IDXX leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IDXX delivers a 70.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $71 in annual profit, vs $-29 for NEOG. NEOG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.44x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CCM's 2.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IDXX scores 7/9 vs NEOG's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -9.8% | +2.0% | +3.8% | -28.6% | +70.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.4% | +0.9% | +1.3% | -17.9% | +32.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -7.7% | +3.7% | +2.0% | +0.2% | +42.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -12.2% | +4.9% | +2.1% | +0.2% | +61.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.43x | 1.14x | 1.37x | 0.44x | 0.67x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3.7B | $154M | $1.1B | $784M | $897M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $216M | $27M | $767M | $129M | $180M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3.9B | $181M | $1.9B | $913M | $1.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -2.40x | 2.36x | 1.46x | -8.33x | 35.55x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RDNT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RDNT five years ago would be worth $25,553 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,693 for CCM. Over the past 12 months, NEOG leads with a +51.1% total return vs CCM's -23.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RDNT at 26.5% vs CCM's -24.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +34.4% | +32.0% | -17.9% | +29.3% | -16.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -23.0% | -16.1% | +3.3% | +51.1% | +14.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.8% | -33.9% | +102.6% | -47.3% | +15.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -83.1% | -56.7% | +155.5% | -80.4% | +6.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.5% | +3.1% | +961.2% | -50.9% | +542.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -24.4% | -12.9% | +26.5% | -19.2% | +4.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CCM and MLAB each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CCM is the less volatile stock with a 0.51 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MLAB's 1.75 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MLAB currently trades 79.8% from its 52-week high vs CCM's 53.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.51x | 1.75x | 1.40x | 1.69x | 1.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.77 | $131.20 | $85.84 | $11.43 | $769.98 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.18 | $55.45 | $50.76 | $4.53 | $485.41 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +53.3% | +79.8% | +67.9% | +79.2% | +72.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 71.0 | 66.3 | 47.0 | 47.4 | 49.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 11K | 125K | 838K | 2.5M | 535K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CCM as "Buy", MLAB as "Hold", RDNT as "Buy", NEOG as "Hold", IDXX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 57.9% upside for RDNT (target: $92) vs -10.2% for MLAB (target: $94). MLAB is the only dividend payer here at 0.61% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $94.00 | $92.00 | $11.00 | $747.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 8 | 11 | 11 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.6% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.64 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +2.7% |
IDXX leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). RDNT leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
CCM vs MLAB vs RDNT vs NEOG vs IDXX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, RadNet, Inc.
(RDNT) is the stronger pick with 11. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -28. 6% for Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited (CCM). IDEXX Laboratories, Inc. (IDXX) offers the better valuation at 42. 8x trailing P/E (38. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited (CCM) a "Buy" — based on 2 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX?
On forward P/E, Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited is actually cheaper at 1.
4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX?
Over the past 5 years, RadNet, Inc.
(RDNT) delivered a total return of +155. 5%, compared to -83. 1% for Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited (CCM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RDNT returned +961. 2% versus CCM's -87. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited (CCM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
51β versus Mesa Laboratories, Inc. 's 1. 75β — meaning MLAB is approximately 246% more volatile than CCM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Neogen Corporation (NEOG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 44% versus 2% for Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), RadNet, Inc.
(RDNT) is pulling ahead at 11. 5% versus -28. 6% for Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited (CCM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Mesa Laboratories, Inc. grew EPS 99. 2% year-over-year, compared to -114. 6% for Neogen Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, NEOG leads at 19. 3% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX?
IDEXX Laboratories, Inc.
(IDXX) is the more profitable company, earning 24. 6% net margin versus -122. 1% for Neogen Corporation — meaning it keeps 24. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IDXX leads at 31. 6% versus -138. 6% for CCM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MLAB leads at 62. 6%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited (CCM) trades at 1.
4x forward P/E versus 94. 4x for RadNet, Inc. — 93. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RDNT: 57. 9% to $92. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX?
In this comparison, MLAB (0.
6% yield) pays a dividend. CCM, RDNT, NEOG, IDXX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CCM or MLAB or RDNT or NEOG or IDXX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Concord Medical Services Holdings Limited (CCM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
51)). Neogen Corporation (NEOG) carries a higher beta of 1. 69 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CCM: -87. 5%, NEOG: -50. 9%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between CCM and MLAB and RDNT and NEOG and IDXX?
These companies operate in different sectors (CCM (Healthcare) and MLAB (Technology) and RDNT (Healthcare) and NEOG (Healthcare) and IDXX (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
MLAB pays a dividend while CCM, RDNT, NEOG, IDXX do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.